An Astrophysicist Turns his Gaze to Gerrymandering

As an assistant research professor in astronomy at Pennsylvania State University, Thomas Beatty is skilled in charting distant worlds. As someone who is politically engaged, he applies some of the same STEM principles to a more down-to-earth subject – his concerns about political gerrymandering of his state’s districts, which have been the subject of recent court rulings and ongoing political debate.

CS: What inspired you to get involved in redistricting issues?

Beatty: The 2016 elections made me feel that I wanted to get involved in something. Here, in Pennsylvania, one of the major problems has been gerrymandering. Many of the congressional districts around Pittsburgh and Philadelphia are held up as poster children for what horrible gerrymandering looks like. Luckily, there was already a group called Fair Districts PA that was setting themselves up. They had a meeting in town, and I said “Hey, I want to go to that.”

CS: How did your involvement with the group grow after that first event?

Thomas Beatty, Ph.D.

Beatty: Showing up is 90% of it – many people volunteer at these meetings, but it seems few actually follow through. I volunteered to be part of their speaker’s bureau and became one of the people who responds to requests from all over the state for Fair Districts speakers. It’s something that I enjoy, and giving talks is something I do a fair amount as an astronomer. In many ways this isn’t that different. Scientists develop skill in public speaking as part of their jobs, and it translates very well to doing this.

CS: What similarities do you see in giving talks to scientific audiences and to the public?

Beatty: Because I speak on political issues, there are some audiences that are more receptive than others. In my mind, that tracks with the differences between giving scientific talks to friendly groups and to groups that feel like being in the water with sharks. Those experiences have been very helpful, because they teach you to read the room, and get a sense of when people are going to try to come down on you.

CS: Any advice to scientists who are speaking in these political contexts?

Beatty: Even when the issues are combative, you can try to be collaborative in the talk. You can frame things not as “I’m right and you’re wrong,” but as “this is a process that we’re all engaged in.” The conversation can be closer to jazz, where people are playing off each other, than to an orchestra where there’s conductor telling everyone what they should be doing.

CS: Does your technical expertise affect how you give talks on redistricting?

Beatty: I’ve found my science and math background very helpful. One thing that the gerrymandering movement is headed toward is finding an objective way to figure out whether gerrymandering is occurring and to create metrics to correct for it. If you’re comfortable with statistical analyses, you can read about the techniques and they’ll make sense. The difficulty is that a lot of non-technical people find the math confusing and get gun-shy when they hear that a computer is going to figure it out for them. Even at the level of the Supreme Court, the justices have said that the math seems too opaque. As a scientist, having a deep understanding of what’s going on can help you explain it in plain language and assuage their concerns in many cases.

CS: Have you reached any of your elected officials?

Beatty: I’ve talked to my state-level representative two or three times. He’s fully on board with redistricting and has really been pushing for it. I’ve also talked twice to my federal congress member, who seems much more neutral about things. In fairness, I’ve realized that I’m talking to him about one issue, and he has twenty issues a day he has to think about and juggle. I like to think that I’ve moved the needle a little bit, but I also know it takes a continuous effort to get people at that level to pay attention to an issue and change their minds.

CS: Has the experience been rewarding?

Beatty: I enjoy talking to the public, and it’s nice to be part of something that started relatively small, at that initial meeting, and see it really get bigger. I’ve only played a small part in that growth, but to be part of it has been very gratifying. It feels like we’re causing something to happen in my state.

Coffee with City Council Members

Tell us about yourself: Griff O’Neill, Hayward, California, Ph.D. in physics

I am a physicist by training, and I work as an engineer in the semiconductor industry.

Why did you decide to engage: I have concerns about the local policing in my neighborhood.

I engaged with my local government to address concerns about petty crime and local policing policy in order to improve the security of my neighborhood. Nothing to do with STEM, really.

What did you do: I had coffee with my city representatives.

I met with two city council members for coffee. One of them came to my house, the other I met in a coffee shop before work. This was the first time I’ve ever done anything like this.

Hayward water tower (Mercurywoodrose)

How did you identify and take advantage of the opportunity: I found their contact information on the city website and emailed with an invitation to discuss my concern.

Because Hayward council members represent the city at large, I cold emailed each member of the city council individually with a detailed explanation of my concern. In the email, I invited them to meet for coffee or visit my house to talk about it. A couple of them enthusiastically responded and offered to meet right away. I found the city council email addresses right on the city web page.

What happened: We talked, and both agreed to pass on my concerns.

I met with two of the city council members. One of them came to my house. Another I met at a coffee shop. We talked about what I was experiencing in my neighborhood and what I thought they could do to help. I also asked them about their priorities. They each promised to raise my concerns with the city manager and the chief of police.

What did you get out of this experience: In addition to securing a commitment from my city council members to look into the issues I raised, I learned how easy it is to approach my elected officials. I also learned that advocacy is more effective with representatives who have agendas aligned with your goals.

What I got specifically was a commitment that the city council members would take up my concern with the chief of police and try to resolve the problems I was noticing. I learned that city council members have a lot of sway to address issues like mine and can help set the policies and priorities of police and other local agencies either explicitly or through their influence.

It was also interesting to see which of the council members responded. Not all of them got back to me. The ones who did were sympathetic because either they had the same concern or they had a public agenda that fit. One of them was also running for mayor. He wanted to meet with voters, especially if they wanted to improve the community. I could not have guessed ahead of time which ones would respond. So the lesson is: if you want a response from city council, reach out to all of the council members by email individually...you never know who shares your opinion and wants to follow up.

They were pretty down to earth and easy to meet with, and the meetings were casual and conversational. In fact, I was surprised how quick and easy it was to get a meeting with a city council member and have influence on my city’s policies. They took an interest in me as an engaged member of the community -- and voter. You don't have to be anyone special, the bar is lower than I thought.

Navigating a Career in Public Service

Aruna Miller believes that there’s a strong need for the problem-solving approach that scientists and engineers can bring to office. After more than 20 years working as a transportation engineer for Montgomery County and other local governments, Aruna Miller ran for, and was elected to, the Maryland legislature in 2010. Now she’s running for Congress in her home state of Maryland because she believes we need more people with a STEM background making policy.

CS: How did you become interested in public service?

Miller: I’ve been someone who has long benefited from public policies in our country, from the immigration policy that allowed my family and I to come here, to the safety net that allowed me to finish college despite financial hardship. My career in public service is a way of giving back.

CS: What was your first step in becoming more engaged in politics?

Aruna Miller

Miller: As you can imagine, running for public office is not on most engineers’ horizons. What sparked my interest was the election in 2000, where our president was ultimately selected by the Supreme Court. I watched the impact of that decision over the years and that’s when I concluded voting isn’t enough -- it’s just the beginning of engagement. I thought that if I care about the direction of the country, I need to do a lot more. So I picked up the phone, called the local Democratic party, and told them I want to volunteer.

CS: What was it like to transition from a political volunteer to a candidate?

Miller: Democracy is difficult to navigate. I love that so many people are engaged right now, but the truth of the matter is that you don’t just wake up one day and say “I’m going to run.” It takes time to build relationships and develop an understanding of a legislative body. When you start as a volunteer, whether for a political party or an advocacy group, you learn at the grassroots level how to make your voice heard. Your chances of succeeding in an election are good if you have a strong background.

CS: Does your engineering background inform your approach to policy?

Miller: Absolutely. Engineers have an analytical way of approaching policy and looking at the data and the facts that are being presented. It helps you be objective and see all sides. I think that has helped me a lot in my career.

For instance, one of the biggest issues for our community is transportation access. It has a huge impact on people’s lives, whether due to traffic and the environmental costs of idling cars, or the effect on businesses deciding to move to our region. When bills related to transportation arrive in the General Assembly, my background and experience as a transportation engineer make me aware of issues that other legislators might not know about. I can bring my ideas to the table, and we’re able to craft a better piece of legislation as a result.

CS: What advice do you have for scientists and engineers who want to get more involved in their communities?

Miller: First, get engaged. Our democracy is stronger when we have more people playing an active role in how our country, our states, and our communities move forward.

Second, step out of your equations and out of your comfort zone. Just because you’re in STEM does not mean that you don’t have a lane in policy-making. You do. You bring a unique perspective to the table, and that’s important. We have a lot of people at the federal level who don’t believe in science and data, and we need more people with technical backgrounds to make their voices heard.

Third, don’t be afraid to lose. You can forget your moral compass if your only objective is to win. You might fall down, but you need to get up and try it again. Lots of people run, and they might not win the first time, but they’ll come back stronger the next time.

Finally, our purpose should be to leave the world a better place than when we found it. If that’s just what you add to your community through your professional work, that’s great. But don’t leave your role in civic engagement out of the equation, whether as a volunteer, through an advocacy group, or running for office one day. Remember - the road to progress is always under construction.

Learning about Local Development Priorities

Tell us about yourself: Jennifer Boehme, Ph.D. in Marine Science

I am Scientist and Advisor at the International Joint Commission in Windsor, Ontario, which is a commission of the U.S. and Canada that has oversight of border waters. I recently settled in Ypsilanti, Michigan.

How did you engage: I went to a City Council meeting on a local development project.

Jennifer Boehme

One afternoon, I found myself chatting with a former city mayor who was canvassing about the Water Street development in Ypsilanti. It sparked my curiosity to learn more about the project. The city had accumulated significant debt to purchase previously-separate riverfront properties into the now-continuous Water Street site. But it has sat undeveloped for many years.

One of my goals as a new resident was to understand local priorities for sustainable development, green infrastructure, and mass transit. The neighborhood listserv announced an upcoming special City Council meeting covering the Water Street site offer, which was a good opportunity to get educated on this long standing issue.

What was it like: There was more focus on community input than legislator comments.

The meeting was very different than I expected. The purpose of the special meeting was to garner public comment, and participation from City Council members was minimal. It was evident that sustainable public benefit and public access to the site were major issues the Council wanted to address before moving forward with development plans. Local stakeholders that spoke out with concerns about the development included citizens groups and members of city commissions.

What did you get out of this experience: I discovered further ways to engage on the issue.

I learned that the city had chartered a Sustainability Commission and a Human Relations Commission, which can bring their information and expertise to advise and inform the Council on development decisions, in addition to the reports provided by property developers. On further digging, I found that citizens could propose study items for the Human Relations Commission in addition to serving as members to both Commissions, which provides an inroad to influence City Council decision makers through their own consensus based process.

The path forward for Water Street is ongoing, and the City Council, Commissions, and developers have continued to engage on how to address community needs.

AAAS Featured Force: ESAL Founder & Chair Arti Garg

A version of this post appeared on March 7, 2018, on AAAS MemberCentral, which features members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. The post is reprinted here with permission.

Arti Garg is the founder and chair of Engineers & Scientists Acting Locally (ESAL). She is also a data scientist living in the California Bay Area, where she serves on a municipal task force.

Previously, Arti was an American Physical Society Congressional Science Fellow in the House Foreign Affairs Committee. She later joined the White House Office of Management and Budget where she oversaw approximately $5 billion of R&D funding at the Department of Energy. Arti has a PhD in physics from Harvard University and an MS in aeronautical & astronautical engineering from Stanford University.

What have you done to be a Force for Science?

About a year ago, I started a group called Engineers & Scientists Acting Locally (ESAL), an organization dedicated to increasing engineers’ and scientists’ engagement in their local (city, county, state) government and communities. Many engineers and scientists are interested in advocating for science-informed and evidence-based policy, but we too often forget the important role that cities, counties, and states play in their development and implementation. There are many avenues for having a substantial impact through your local government! One that I would love to see more people consider is applying to serve on a local government board or commission.

What contact have you had with your representatives?

I serve on a municipal task force, which puts me in regular contact with my mayor and members of my city council. The task force work helped me establish relationships with my municipal representatives. With that foundation, I am now working [with] a couple of representatives to advocate strategically for issues that matter to me like affordable housing and renewable energy investment.

Read a book you are dying to tell your peers about? Give us a brief summary and why you love it.

How Economics Shapes Science by Paula Stephan. Stephan provides a data-filled and detailed history and overview of the United States’ research and development (R&D) enterprise. It should be required reading for anyone who wants to participate in policy or advocacy work related to R&D funding.

Share a comment or opinion you have on a topical science-related issue.

As engineers and scientists with an interest in government, we need to be careful not to become relegated to special interest group status. I would guess that most of us got interested in science out of a belief that scientific understanding adds fundamental value to the human experience. It can be easy to narrow our focus on how policy impacts the practice of science. But we are also part of a broader community of people who are impacted by policy decisions every day. Learning about and finding common cause with other members of and groups in our communities are what make us effective civic participants. For those of us with other day jobs, local government engagement provides an accessible vehicle for impactful, issues-oriented advocacy.

Share a web link/video/blog etc. that you’ve thought was especially compelling at communicating science.

Bloomberg Businessweek published an interactive graphic in 2015 that broke down the impact of factors that affect global temperatures. This one graphic provides a simple summary of the relevant science ranging from atmospheric chemistry to ecology to solar physics as well as demonstrating how scientists use the output of complex computer simulations to understand their observations.

Civic Engagement for Sustainable Buildings

As an innovator and "maker" at the nexus of the built environment, energy, and transportation sectors; I frequently need to integrate first-of-their-kind electrical systems with other building technologies. To accomplish this, I use new materials and construction techniques that exceed, and help to advance, existing codes and local regulations. Even in a forward-looking city like San Francisco, though, the development of a building like Sol Lux Alpha – the first multi-unit residential nanogrid project in the United States – wasn't easy.

Developing a Narrative

John Sarter

It began with an email I sent to the mayor at the time, Gavin Newsom. My letter suggested that the sustainable building I proposed would benefit both the residents, the community, and the City of San Francisco.

The idea was that a "nanogrid" building could not only use zero energy, on average, but could possibly even produce more energy than it used. This kind of system would allow carbon-neutral living and transportation and could also serve as a model for other developers. While I did not receive a reply from the mayor’s office, the narrative I wrote was powerful enough to convince investors and spark the interest of others in San Francisco's government.

Building a Network

To generate public support for the project, I built connections within the local community by attending “Meetup” groups and seminars on sustainable buildings. These events allowed me to meet other engineers and scientists who shared my interest in sustainable development, including in tackling some of the related regulatory and technical challenges. It was also where I met Scott Edmondson, a planner from the city’s Planning Department, and Barry Hooper of the Department of Environment. The members of these forward-thinking departments have been instrumental in recognizing the value of integrating and demonstrating the technologies that will drive the transition to a low carbon economy. Through these interactions, I learned that approaching the relevant city agencies is an effective way to gain traction for a concept.

The city staff were also instrumental in facilitating meetings with the groups that had direct oversight of building permitting. As a result, we were able to push the envelope on what the city would allow. For instance, we built San Francisco’s first “full property line extent” solar array, fully realizing the renewable energy potential of the site, which was a key element of the project. As a byproduct of this work, we were able to get officials to make revisions to the Building and Fire Codes, making it easier for others to build advanced energy systems on their own property.

Working with Regulators

Sol Lux Alpha - Nanogrid-powered residential building (John Sarter)

The strong network was vital to addressing problematic issues throughout the life of the project. For example, when we applied to the local utility’s Interconnect Department for a “net energy metering” link to the grid, we had problems getting them to start their review. After several delays, I decided to bring some contacts I had made in California’s Public Utility Commission into the conversation. It was remarkable how quickly the utility found a resolution! We even qualified for a “special study” program which would expedite the process.

In most of California, as in other states, the electric utility model is based on the expectations of centralized generation and procurement. This makes rapid transformation and innovation difficult. When pushing the technology envelope, there are bound to be conflicts, some legitimate and some not. Fortunately for my project, California is a very progressive state when it comes to energy policy, and there are political resources to help "move the ball forward."

Making an Impact

All the work has paid off. The Sol Lux Alpha project will be completed and ready for occupancy in Spring of 2018. It’s already sparked a lot of interest, and has been visited by groups ranging from Lawrence Berkeley National Lab energy researchers to Oakland’s EcoBlock project.

If you want to engage in efforts like mine, I recommend having a solid plan, complete with contingencies, to approach your target industry. If you encounter excessive resistance or red tape, loop in your state or local contacts and ask them for their guidance. If they understand the merits of your proposal, they will likely take action to help. I strongly encourage civically-minded people with backgrounds in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) to nurture relationships with municipal and state agencies. I've found that, for the most part, people are truly in it "for good." And for those of you who share my passion for building a more sustainable future, remember, this is a task we can all accomplish best together.

Serving on a Citizens’ Advisory Committee

Tell us about yourself: Amy Nagengast, San Francisco, CA, Ph.D. in Civil and Environmental Engineering, P.E., LEED AP

I found my enthusiasm for engineering while getting my B.S. in Civil Engineering from UW-Madison. After working for a couple years as an engineer in the water and wastewater industry, I decided to focus on the interdisciplinary area of sustainable design while getting my Ph.D. from Carnegie Mellon University.

Currently, my engineering career revolves around the intersection between buildings, energy, and people. I strive to make buildings a healthy environment for people to live and work in while minimizing energy, water, and waste.

Amy Nagengast

How did you engage: I applied to a local citizens’ advisory committee (CAC).

I always thought that my engineering background and analytical mind, combined with my passion for infrastructure and buildings, might be a good fit for a local utility board at some point. After a short internet search, I found the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Citizens’ Advisory Committee (CAC). The committee consists of 17 individuals, appointed by various San Francisco elected officials, who provide recommendations on important topics of power, water, and sewer. After researching the CAC, I applied to the position for the district where I live, and I was appointed by my District Supervisor.

What were the steps: I submitted an application and had an interview.

Before deciding to apply, I went to a couple CAC meetings to learn about the committee. I left the first meeting engaged in the topic areas and enthusiastic to apply. The application was a two-page short-answer questionnaire that asked about my professional experience and civic involvement. The last step was an interview with my District Supervisor where I felt nervous, having rarely spoken to or met a city official. Should I try to convey my technical knowledge on water, power, and sewer topics as an professional engineer? Should I ask questions to see if his infrastructure agenda matches my beliefs since I would be his appointee? Should I aim to connect with him on a non-political level? While the meeting was short, we hit on all of these questions so I was glad I thought through them in advance. A few days after the interview, I got an email saying I got the position!

What did you get out of this experience: Serving on the CAC has been intellectually rewarding and given me a new appreciation for my community.

A snapshot of topics addressed by the Citizen's Advisory Committee includes the 20 year Sewer System Improvement Plan, electric service rates, public art, workforce development and the ever-growing Adopt-a-Drain program. The latter is a program that allows residents to prevent flooding by keeping debris clear of street storm drains and giving the drains fun names such as “Midnight Drain to Georgia” and “Brain Drain”. Being on the CAC has been fulfilling, from the diversity of topics discussed at meetings to the opportunities to positively impact my community.

Interning for a State Representative

Since March 2017, I’ve spent my free time as an intern for New Jersey state Assemblyman Andrew Zwicker, Ph.D. While it may seem overwhelming to dedicate time to working in state government while also working toward a Ph.D., I have found it to be very doable and rewarding. For me, it has also been an achievable way to explore public policy while continuing my scientific training and research.

Becoming a State Assembly intern was straightforward

Chris Tokita

My foray into state government was as easy as a phone call. I didn’t originally set out to join the office of my assemblyman; I didn’t even know that was a possibility. Instead, I was calling my representatives as part of semi-regular, informal phone banking sessions, in which we’d reach out to our elected officials about particular issues like science funding or healthcare policy. Finding that I had quickly reached the end of my list of federal representatives, I decided to give a ring to my state-level representatives.

I was excited to call Assemblyman Zwicker’s office. Before graduate school, I took two years off to be a federal science policy fellow at the IDA Science and Technology Policy Institute in Washington, D.C., where I worked with members of the executive branch on science-related policy work ranging from evaluating the efficacy of biomedical research grants for spurring innovative research to understanding the nation’s earth-observing capabilities to fostering a more diverse and representative STEM workforce. I’d seen and felt the importance of having members of government with STEM backgrounds. So my enthusiasm was tangible when I called and expressed my support and admiration of Assemblyman Zwicker, who is a trained physicist and works at the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (New Jersey elected officials don’t work fulltime as legislators). His director of constituent relations, who had answered my call, asked if I would consider interning at the office, even suggesting that I send in my resume so she could pass it along to their policy director.

I polished up my resume and sent it into the office. I got a call back inviting me to come speak with them in person, and from there, my work in the office started. It really was that straightforward, and any graduate student, postdoc, or even career scientist or engineer could do it. Even if you don’t have previous policy experience, it doesn’t matter. Assemblyman Zwicker has said to me that what he values about graduate students and trained scientists in his office are their analytical skills and ability to parse through evidence and research for good ideas.

My efforts could impact major policy initiatives

Photo of a joint committee hearing on nuclear energy subsidies in the New Jersey State House. Assemblyman Zwicker (foreground, seated second from the right) can be seen asking a question to an expert witness (Chris Tokita)

Every week, I spend about four hours working in the assemblyman’s office on policy research. This typically means researching a legislative topic and preparing a briefing for the assemblyman that surveys the possible legislative actions. For example, when I first joined the office, I was assigned to look into autonomous vehicles. I scoured reports by relevant organizations, like the RAND Corporation and the US Department of Transportation, to compile an overview of the pressing issues that will need legislative attention at the state level. I then researched what sorts of policies other states had put in place as a list of “role model” legislation that New Jersey could implement. After weeks of work, I submitted a two-page briefing to the assemblyman and policy director. My work will help the assemblyman craft bills he can introduce to modernize the state’s motor vehicle laws to make room for possible autonomous vehicle use. The time may be right for these policies, since New Jersey’s new governor has a strong interest in bolstering its STEM economy.

It’s quite surprising how much science- and technology-related policy happens at the state and local levels. In addition to working on autonomous vehicles, I’ve helped research emission-reducing policies (e.g., cap-and-trade vs. carbon tax), helped respond to constituent inquiries about state agricultural regulations regarding honey bees, and even looked into how New Jersey could foster technology innovation with state-backed venture capital. I recently had the exciting opportunity to sit in on a standing-room-only hearing on nuclear energy subsidies in the state.

My background and training in a STEM field, perhaps surprisingly, prepares me well for policy work. Much like preparing a manuscript for publication, writing a policy briefing requires you to take the wide, sometimes endless amount of information on a topic and boil it down to an essential overview of the most essential elements. The ability to read reports and research documents critically, like a scientist, allows me to quickly find relevant information and omit spurious claims on the issue. Even more so, my comfort with quantitative information allows me to pack a statistical punch into every briefing or policy position I draft.

Working with my state government has personal and professional rewards

Aside from researching specific science-related policy topics, I’ve had the chance to see intimately how government works at the state level. Although I joined the office as a policy research intern, I still work as a general member of the office as needed when I’m around. This has given me ample opportunities to answer constituent calls and discuss their concerns or to help with the logistics of events organized by the assemblyman’s office, like job fairs and book drives. Occasionally, I’ve had a chance to sit in with the assemblyman when he meets with constituents, and have been invited to chime into conversations about topics ranging from library funding to voting rights.

I feel that working in state government has grounded my Ph.D. research and allowed me to gain another source of satisfaction outside of science. For one, seeing science interface with policy and society has helped bring perspective to the potential importance of my own work. Even though I largely work in abstract, theoretical biology, having a weekly reminder of how science can be applied to society’s ails helps me at least envision what may be the long-term value of my work. Second, while I definitely believe in the value of science in society, I recognize it is a very long-term endeavor, often with very delayed gratification. Thus, working in policy allows me to impact my community much more immediately, even if those impacts are, for now, very modest.

There are always a million excuses not to do something, including graduate school. Trust me when I say, if you think you’re interested in policy, then you can start right now. Phone your state legislator. There’s a good chance they’re interested in what you have to say, and they may even love to have you volunteer with them for a few hours a week.

Visiting the Office of the Mayor

Tell us about yourself: Tim Oolman, Charleston, South Carolina, Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering

I have spent my career in industrial research & development, where my mission is to transform innovation into sustainable solutions in food and nutrition. I recently relocated to Charleston to be closer to family, where I now work remotely.

Why get involved: I wanted to have impact outside my job.

Tim Oolman, PhD

As I look toward the end of my traditional career, I am motivated to engage with my new community to address the broader challenges in our society and communities. My passion is addressing climate change, from the global challenges of reducing the risk to the local challenges of dealing with the consequences.

How did you engage: I met with a number of city officials.

To get started building connections in Charleston, I reached out to anyone that seemed to have an interest in climate change. I was amazed by the enthusiastic connectors I found. We have all heard there the six degrees of separation; I have learned that in Charleston it’s typically two degrees of separation! That’s the benefit of acting locally!

One of the early connections I made was with Mayor John Tecklenburg, when he held a meet-and-greet at my local coffee shop. I would like to claim that I planned the encounter, but the truth is that I was unaware of the event until someone approached me to ask “would you like to talk to the mayor?” We talked for only a few minutes, but I was able to arrange a subsequent hour-long discussion in City Hall with Rick Jerue, senior advisor to the Mayor.

Charleston, S.C. City Hall (Billy Hathorn)

What was it like: My local officials take climate change impacts seriously.

I learned that city offices in Charleston are filled by non-partisan elections, which bypasses many of the pitfalls of our state and national politics.

I also learned that while politicians at the national level may argue about the global causes of climate change, local officials are actively engaging with the consequences. Being a coastal city, Charleston has seen flooding from two hurricanes in the 15 months that I have lived here. In addition, the frequency of nuisance flooding between storms has increased an order of magnitude over recent years.

Recent studies have shown that the cumulative costs of nuisance flooding, which get borne by local governments, are projected to be as significant as that of major storms, which get the attention of the media and the federal government. Even in the conservative deep south, the challenges of climate change are being taken very seriously at the local level. One example of how Charleston is managing these challenges is through its recent appointment of a Chief Resilience Officer.

While I certainly continue to communicate my opinions to my U.S. Senators, I have decided that acting locally is likely to be more immediately impactful.

Taking Politicians to the Lab

In the past year, I made a purposeful effort to become more active in my community as a science advocate, and I found that many of my fellow graduate students and faculty were interested in reaching out to their elected representatives as well. Like me, they wanted to be involved in the public discourse on policies related to their work but were frustrated with canned responses from their representatives after writing technical and thoughtful letters and emails. Many of us just didn’t understand who our representatives were, what they did, and how to connect with them to impact policy.

Leah Pagnozzi

I started "Take a Politician to Work Day" out of a desire to give a voice to my fellow scientists and engineers. The program’s main goal is to reach out and build connections with our city and state representatives. We accomplish this by bringing them to campus for lab tours led by graduate students and post doctoral researchers. This encourages the development of an organic connection between scientists and policy-makers. By giving our politicians campus connections in their policy areas of interest, they have a contact if they ever need it and a familiar name to look out for when these graduate students and postdocs reach out in the future. It also gives motivation for these rising scientists to continue engaging by giving them a tangible, personal, and positive outreach experience. It’s been amazing to see this program take off and grow! We’ve reached our mayor, city council members, Congressional candidates, and state officials.

One memorable visit happened last spring, when we had state Assemblywoman Barbara Lifton and her legislative aide Linda Smith tour labs centered around climate change impacts on agriculture and battery storage research. She was particularly enthusiastic to see the scientists at work due to her commitment to science-based policy as well as her advocacy for sustainability efforts. Several scientists she has worked with previously on drafting legislation to ban fracking in our district were present at a campus roundtable discussion, and it was fascinating to hear how a policy-maker and technical experts worked together to support, present, and draft the legislation.

From left: Legislative Aide Linda Smith, NY State Assemblywoman Barbara Lifton, and Author Leah Pagnozzi

One of the new contacts she met with on her tour had built a model of how climate predictions, as well as historical events such as droughts and frosts, impact our apple and corn crops in a geographically-specific fashion. She was so excited by this model, she asked for a copy. She began to plug in predictive elements based on a late frost for several farms that she was familiar with in the district, and she used the output to help her understand how that could impact harvests months later.

When I began developing "Take a Politician to Work Day", I didn’t realize all of the skills and resources available to me as a scientist. I remember thinking, “all I have is access to a lab.” And then I realized that access to a lab and the people that run them is access to a very different environment than most representatives have!

The most rewarding aspect of this has been learning about the research happening on campus and the amazing work going on in my communities. By connecting labs, scientists, politicians, and community leaders, I have become more aware and invested in my campus and town. Wrapped up in my little world of research, it was easy to forget that there are thousands of researchers in hundreds of fields working right beside me and right down the road there is an entire city at work. I love sharing an interest in policy and advocacy with so many people from backgrounds I would never have connected with before. And I’ve learned it’s important to just get out there! There are so many options to engage with your community from running for the school board, to writing an Op-Ed, to attending a march or a science policy happy hour, to starting a club, to going to town hall meetings, all the way to inviting your politicians to work.